Petrovic v Victorian WorkCover Authority

[2018] VSCA 243

Victorian Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Accident Compensation
2. › Serious injury application
3. › Psychiatric injury
4. › Permanent severe mental or behavioural disturbance or disorder
5. › Whether applicant satisfied threshold
6. › Applicant found entirely unreliable
7. › Accident Compensation Act 1985 (Vic), s 134AB(16)(b), s 134AB(37)
1. Evidence
2. › Witnesses
3. › Credibility
4. › Unchallenged affidavit evidence
5. › Whether judge required to accept unchallenged evidence
6. › Whether failure to cross-examine witness determinative
7. › Evidence of witness with close relationship to party
1. Evidence
2. › Expert evidence
3. › Psychiatric opinions
4. › Factual foundation for expert opinions
5. › Whether expert opinions admissible where underlying history unreliable
6. › Dependence of psychiatric diagnosis on patient history
1. Appeal
2. › Application for leave to appeal
3. › County Court
4. › Whether proposed appeal has real prospect of success
5. › Sequential expression of reasons
6. › Whether judge considered evidence as a whole

Quick Take

In serious injury applications under s 134AB of the Accident Compensation Act 1985 (Vic), where a plaintiff's credibility is comprehensively destroyed, a trial judge is not required to accept unchallenged corroborative evidence from a closely related witness, and such evidence cannot rehabilitate expert psychiatric opinions that depend on the accuracy of the plaintiff's own history. The sequential expression of reasons does not indicate a failure to consider the evidence as a whole.